I love trolling Nintendo even though I love me some Mario and Zelda, but this time genuinely was awful right?

- The launch lineup is poor (although I'll concede that the Lego game and Pikmin 3 looked great)
- They're already pumping out last year's PS3/360 games with new controls tacked on
- We still have no dates, specs or prices
- I don't think asymmetric multiplayer is as fun as they think it is.

I don't think the hardware is bad - I just think they needed to come on stage, announce a new 3D Mario (or something), then tell us all that all those third-party Q4 2011/Q1 2013 games we're looking forward to are coming to Wii U as well as the other consoles.

Not unveiling a big new Nintendo game and not proving that any third-party beyond the obvious ones have taken an interest in the console is a big let-down this close to launch.

Seriously, though, I'm not especially interested in seeing this console generation end. In the past, the end of one generation of game consoles has always felt more or less natural--even though it is obviously part of a predetermined business strategy, by the time a new crop of machines comes out, there is good reason for it. The "old" consoles have been long since surpassed by the average home computer, and there are several hardware and/or software features which both gamers and developers want to see incorporated into the next batch.

This generation kind of brought an end to that. Hardware development has crossed a threshold--reached a point in the objective level of the technology where the hardware is good enough that most developers shouldn't have any trouble realizing their vision. And since one of the major additions in this last generation was adopting the PC world's ability to deliver live updates (both to games and to system functionality) and downloadable content, these systems can--and have--evolve(d) over time on the software side to fill in any gaps in functionality that may have become apparent in the six years since their debut.

Nintendo, of course, is the exception.

By choosing to launch a small, inexpensive device more on par with the previous generation, they *have* to launch a new system in order to compete. The Wii's processing power is more comparable to the Xbox than anything modern, and while it has adopted the simplest and most obvious bits of "modern" software functionality (namely: online gameplay and downloadable titles), it has largely spurned the more evolutionary approach of its competitors. As a result, both the hardware and the software feel significantly dated. Nintendo is a great developer, and their software alone is enough to keep a system viable to a certain degree. But overall, the Wii simply can't compete. They have no choice but to ready new hardware.

The best news for me out of E3 was actually a distinct lack of news: the fact that Microsoft and Sony did not talk about next-generation systems. Both systems have evolved significantly since their launch, and aside from the axiom that more horsepower is always welcome, there isn't anything these systems feel to be lacking. Yes, it's been six years since the PS3 launched and a surprising seven since the 360 made its debut, kicking off this generation. However, there's no need for anything else right now. Bringing this generation to an end when there is no perceived need for it would just feel like a forced end, for no reason other than to make everyone re-buy hardware.

So, the fact that Nintendo is readying a new system while the 360 and the PS3 remain feels right. Sure, E3 seems less exciting this year. But that's because of the crop of games--these games wouldn't look any more exciting on a shiny new box than they would on our current hardware.

I honestly don't know if I'm going to buy a WiiU. I'm certainly not interested in replacing my PS3 right now, and we wouldn't even have a 3DS if Eva hadn't gotten it as a gift. (We have a total of two 3DS-specific games: Mario Land and the Ocarina remake). It's not that I don't use my consoles; quite the contrary. It's that I'm content with them.

Catch the gameplay for Watch Dogs. Everyone assumed it was next-gen but it's for current consoles. While the demo probably was running on a high-end PC - it wasn't the quality of the graphics that particularly seduced me, it was just the overall production values and attention to detail. When compared with say, GTA4, which is perhaps the most obvious example of an open-world American city this generation, the gulf in quality is astounding.

What Rockstar accomplished 4/5 years ago blew us all away, but now it looks like old tat because we're at the other end of this hardware's lifecycle. Aaaand there's enough games coming out at this end to keep me very happy with my PS3 - including Rockstar's own response to all this progress (hopefully). I have no idea how much longer things will drag on for, but I really don't mind. I don't feel like I'm missing out on something due to a lack of hardware progress.

Plus I think when it finally is all done, I'll be looking back at this gen as the greatest ever, because there's such a huge range of AAA titles that perfectly manage to capture the developer's vision without concessions, which is what everyone's been trying to do since this whole videogames thing started.

Nothing really interested me outside of hardware except the rumored F-Zero and the video of Majora's mask not even sure if it was real or not. I don't even know if a Smash Bros game could make buy the console the first year.

It's Wii all over again - gimmicky controller, third party lineup consisting of some current gen ports, doesn't look like a graphical leap from what's come to be the standard of the past gen, and no big Nintendo names (not even remakes which make fanboys drop their cash all over again). The main difference could be having to sit down to handle the controls.

At least Wii had that whole casual gaming marketing that pushed the hardware sales. Where are they going with this? The touch screen games niche seems covered by phones and proper tablets (even more for touch enabled apps). And having a "pro" controller isn't likely to win them "hardcore" gamers because it's optional. I really don't see how anyone would bother with it since the whole novelty is the bundled tablet-pad.

I'd put my money on this one being an overall failure. Well, I won't be putting any money into it.

Well, I'm taking the unpopular route here and say that I'm excited for Wii U. I agree that the launch lineup is weak, but Nintendo is putting major focus on two areas that the other two big systems are not: family gaming and local multiplayer.

The Wii is still the only systemme and my buddies play when get together about once a week. Just the sheer amount of awesome local multiplayer games on the thing has paid for itself time and time again. It's the type of gaming I can't get near as much of on Xbox or Playstation. Getting four people together and 100% completing New Super Mario Bros Wii was a blast, and we have been spending the last 3 months working our way through Dokapon Kingdom. The Wii U has no intentions of changing this, instead making it even better for us with even more local multiplayer minigames and Mario madness that we love.

And the family gaming focus is also appealing just because the other systems aren't really doing it. Sure, Microsoft has Kinect, but did you watch the conference? It's was game after game of KILL EVERYTHING, and it's personally wearing. But with Nintendo, you have a whole string of franchises that are great games for everyone.

If I was still a college student, Nintendo would probably be pissing me off right now, but I'm a guy with a 3-year-old that hangs out with a group of guys that also have 3-7 year-olds. Having a console that is both fun for the kids and fun for a group of 30-year-old guys is a huge selling point, and only Nintendo is doing that. So when Nintendo pitches a system that's like the Wii, only in HD and with a cool gimmick that doesn't involve dancing in front of a camera, I'm sold.

Juan wrote:It's Wii all over again - gimmicky controller, third party lineup consisting of some current gen ports, doesn't look like a graphical leap from what's come to be the standard of the past gen, and no big Nintendo names (not even remakes which make fanboys drop their cash all over again). The main difference could be having to sit down to handle the controls.

At least Wii had that whole casual gaming marketing that pushed the hardware sales. Where are they going with this? The touch screen games niche seems covered by phones and proper tablets (even more for touch enabled apps). And having a "pro" controller isn't likely to win them "hardcore" gamers because it's optional. I really don't see how anyone would bother with it since the whole novelty is the bundled tablet-pad.

I'd put my money on this one being an overall failure. Well, I won't be putting any money into it.

Those are the same impressions I have. Nintendo will have a really hard time this time.

The N64 at least had the best graphics and the built-in analog stick, the GC had Nintendo's own games with really good 3D visuals, the Wii had built-in motion controls by default. Touch screen games? Even the DS already covered that. There's nothing in the Wii U that the mainstream public hasn't had access to before, and I suspect that the PS3 + Vita combo will end up being far more interesting to developers.

I remember when Nintendo still used to push the envelope, and it's sad to see things going this way. They should have just focused on raw specs, networking and allowed usage of the 3DS as a controller instead.

Word is that there was a 5GB update online on launch day that has already bricked some systems, and that several advertised features (e.g. Wii backward compatibility) are not present in the firmware shipped in the box. I'd say that points firmly in the direction of "rushed mess".

"You know, I have a great, wonderful, really original method of teaching antitrust law, and it kept 80 percent of the students awake. They learned things. It was fabulous." -- Justice Stephen Breyer

My biggest concern is the fact that it's pretty much on par with current-gen consoles. The Wii got away with it, because Nintendo was doing something new at the time. But now that developers have seen how sharply sales dropped off in the second half of the cycle, and how many important titles have to be either significantly reworked or just aren't practical to port because of how far Nintendo's system is behind its competitors, they might not be so willing to dive in again.

On the other hand, by also being one of the top game developers, Nintendo still has a built-in captive audience... and the actual baseline of the hardware is considerably higher now. The Wii still had very real hardware limitations on what even small independent developers could do; assuming the Wii U is roughly on par with the PS3, that should give developers powerful enough hardware to pretty much do what they want with smaller projects.

Again, I think this is very much a "wait and see" situation. I'm wary of how Nintendo is handling the Wii U, but I'm certainly not ready to write it off. Remember how much we mocked the PS3 during its disastrous first year? Fast-forward to the end of the cycle, and not only is it a very nice addition to a home theater in general, it's got quite a formidable software catalog.

Similarly, games media loved to bash the GameCube as a "struggling" or even "failing" system... but it had more than enough great titles to justify owning the console. And a big part of that is the fact that Nintendo was--and still is--one of the best game developers out there.

The worrying thing is, even if it's in-line with current gen consoles...I have an endless list of current-gen games that aren't seeing Wii U versions. With the general excuse being "it has that tablet thing so we're going to have to shoe-horn that into a port somehow".

Back when the PS3 came out, it felt rushed, over priced, below expectations. Even the developers were disappointed Namco ended the exclusivity of Tekken, a relationship that had been around for over a decade.

Continued investing and support for the product began changing public perception and a few years down the road, everybody bought the PS3. Even me, and I was still some what SONY SCREWED SEGA, FUCK SONY KINDA NOOB!

The thing about today's gaming landscape is that they have so much more money to burn. My thinking is that Nintendo has generated enough revenue from Wii/DS to support Wii U/3DS properly for the next decade and in time it will have the right software and following.

That said, I probably won't be buying it, cause by the time it is economical and worthy enough my interest in gaming would be even less.

Friend has it. Scribblenauts Unlimited is great. 3DS version lacks the object editor, which is really cool. ZombiU is entertaining, but not amazing - worth a play. Nintendo Land is very fun multiplayer, especially like Luigi's Mansion (a lot like Pac Man VS). Online community stuff thus far is better than Live in my opinion - the drawings are a lot of fun to see, the atmosphere is more upbeat and positive, and the connections just seem better. Then again, might just be the early adopter vibe.

Big downside? Luigi's Mansion freezes the Wii U, and so do other things. Freezes so bad you have to unplug it. Nintendo says it's a software issue, but still, pretty bad for launch week on the damn packin title. Cautiously optimistic about the system, I'll get one eventually.

How to be a Conservative:
You have to believe everything that has ever gone wrong in the history of your country was due to Liberals.

As it turns out, Eva's father got us a Wii U Deluxe for Christmas. The only Wii U titles we have are New Super Mario Bros. U and the pack-in game (Nintendo Land), but it's really nice if for no other reason than to let us play our Wii games again. Guess we'll have to keep the GameCube set up for older titles, though.

I like the hardware a lot. It's compact, it's quiet, and the tablet thinger is actually quite comfortable to hold and use. The fact that it relies mostly on Wii accessories is also nice, as we already have a number of Wii peripherals, and being able to avoid re-buying extra controllers is always welcome.

So far, I'm not sure how many titles are in the works that we'll be getting, but the system did just launch. This is the first time I've ever had a console less than 6 months after it came out, so I suspect we'll still be using it primarily for Wii games for the first year or so.

Speaking of which, I do find the Wii implementation a bit clunky. Rather than simply running Wii software, the whole unit kicks into a a simulated Wii mode (complete with Wii menu) in order to run Wii discs. This is also how downloaded Wii titles are handled; rather than taking your Virtual Console and other DLC games and sticking them on the Wii U home screen, you have to go into "Wii Mode" in order to launch them.

This also means that your Wii purchases are still shackled to the unique hardware, rather than a portable ID. If you already had a Wii, you have to use a somewhat clunky transfer tool to move your Wii's data (both the permissions for your downloaded games and your save data) to the Wii U's "Wii Mode." Even if you already had your Wii downloads on an SD card, you still have to re-download them AFTER running this transfer process, because the download process is apparently what links the file to the hardware. Also, the transfer tool both erases and deauthorizes your old Wii from using said content, so you can forget keeping the Wii around as a secondary system. Additionally, a few titles (notably Ghosts & Goblins and Lost Winds) are simply not available for download any more, so if you bought either of those, that's money down the drain once you've performed the transfer.

I really hope that the Wii U's profile-linked approach is the beginning of a company-wide move toward modernizing its content management, especially now that Nintendo is pushing digital downloads of full retail games. Even so, there is a lot of room for improvement: the Wii U and 3DS eShops do not appear to talk to each other or interconnect in any way, purchased Wii content is not only not linked to but is unavailable in the Wii U eShop, and the Wii U eShop also has very little content at the moment. Half of what it has consists of full-price downloads of games that are available on disc.

Here's one thing that is really nice: the tablet screen. It looks quite sharp, there doesn't appear to be any noticeable lag, and it's very handy. If you're playing a game and someone else wants to watch TV, you can keep playing on the tablet and let the TV switch elsewhere. Similarly, it's quite handy for watching Netflix in the other room. We don't use the built-in TV remote functionality because we have a Logitech Harmony for that, but it's a nice touch that most people will probably appreciate.

I've also noticed that even with our old, pre-Motion Plus Wiimotes (and even in Wii Mode), the pointer seems both more accurate and more stable on the Wii U. The Wii U also seems to get better wifi reception... but then again, my Wii has always had trouble with the wifi. The network module actually failed about 6 months after I got it, and I had to send it in for warranty repair. It's never been great, and was always far inferior to the PS3 right next to it. The Wii U does not appear to have this problem.

Again, the system has only been out for a month, so in many ways it's far too early to evaluate. I have no doubt that Nintendo will release a number of must-own titles by the time it's finished its run. (Eva is already anticipating the release of Pikmin 3, for example, and New Super Mario Bros. U is just as polished and entertaining as you'd expect it to be). The use of the Internet in sharing Miis and comments is minor but clever, and adds an extra community dimension to things. Let's just hope it pulls in the kind of third-party support it needs.

1. The tablet is incredibly well engineered. The screen is bright and crisp (800x480, I believe), the speakers are surprisingly decent, the battery life is better than you'd expect, and it is exceptionally comfortable in your hands. Games that let you play on the tablet (e.g. New Super Mario Bros. U) run flawlessly, and there is ZERO detectable lag or dropout. The controls are very comfortable, and it has a very similar feel to the Classic Controller Pro. I just wish it had a longer range; the signal doesn't pass through walls well, and it would be nice to use the tablet to play Mario or watch Netflix in bed or while cooking dinner. Similarly, it would be nice to be able to use the 3DS as a tablet.

2. Wii compatibility is basically... well, a Wii. Playing Wii games or using downloaded Wii content does absolutely nothing that a regular Wii wouldn't. Games aren't upscaled or rendered in a higher resolution. You can't use Wii U-specific features or accessories (such as the tablet or Pro Controller), and as previously mentioned, all Wii downloads are confined to "Wii Mode" and do not connect to your Wii U eShop account. It would be nice if there was a way to migrate those to native Wii U apps, especially since many of the VC titles are also available via the 3DS eShop. It would also be nice to be able to use the tablet as a controller/screen for Virtual Console and supported Wii games, and the Virtual Console *still* doesn't let you adjust the aspect ratio or video filter.

3. The Miis were a nifty idea on the Wii that didn't really seem to go anywhere. It looks like the Wii U will be the platform that helps them realize their true potential; they are much more integrated into the system here, which is significantly helped by the Wii U's "always online" connectivity.

4. Between the TV screen and the tablet, I can't help but notice that Nintendo has created a system that would be ideal for playing DS (and even 3DS) games on the big screen. I know that's not something the company is particularly interested in, but it would be a welcome option. Also, while the tablet offers a very well-functioning (but highly limited) short-range streaming service, I would like to see this ability extended through the Internet to the DS, the way a PS3 can be used remotely from a PSP or PSVita.

5. It's also (mildly) disappointing that the Wii U doesn't play DVDs or BluRay movies. I didn't really expect this, as Nintendo has always been clear that its consoles are gaming machines and not multipurpose media devices... but since it comes preloaded with Netflix, YouTube, Aamzon Prime, *and* Hulu Plus (not to mention the system's attempt to replace your TV remote), that line is getting blurry. If the Wii U had the ability to play these videos, you wouldn't need anything else hooked up to the TV.

6. New Super Mario Bros. U is very fun and very polished, just as you'd expect it to be. Did you like the one for Wii? This one's very similar, only tweaked and improved in a million tiny ways. The Miiverse integration is unobtrusive and entertaining. The level of polish on first-party Nintendo titles, particularly with AAA franchises, has always set the benchmark for the industry, and while NSMBU doesn't really do anything *new*, it does exactly what it's supposed to do, exactly how it's supposed to do it. The only other Wii U game we have is Nintendo Land, which we haven't played yet, so I can't speak to Wii software in general... but it will be interesting to see how (if at all) the tablet and the Miiverse will influence game design.

7. Smash Bros. I've been playing Smash Bros. with GameCube controllers (and only GameCube controllers) for 10 years now. Since the U doesn't doesn't have GC ports, I guess I'll finally have to get used to a different control scheme. I tried the Classic Controller, but I keep getting thrown by the fact that the button placement is rotated 90 degrees from what I'm used to. The remote+nunchuk option may be best, unless someone knows of an adapter that lets you plug a GC controller into the remote as a Classic Controller stand-in. It'll also be strange adapting to using the Classic Controller for N64 VC games.

8. One very minor difference: while Wii content is not rendered at a higher resolution, the signal being sent to the TV is still a widescreen, HD signal, even in Wii Mode. By contrast, the signal from an original Wii is 480i/p, 4:3, even if the console is set to widescreen. As a result, we had to manually set the aspect ratio on the TV whenever we used the Wii, or it would appear squished. So the Wii U is slightly more convenient in that regard... also, as a result of the upscaling, the Wii software does appear very SLIGHTLY filtered, making it just enough softer to make the jaggies not quite so... well, jaggy. Everything's still being rendered at its original resolution, though.

DaMadFiddler wrote:7. Smash Bros. I've been playing Smash Bros. with GameCube controllers (and only GameCube controllers) for 10 years now. Since the U doesn't doesn't have GC ports, I guess I'll finally have to get used to a different control scheme. I tried the Classic Controller, but I keep getting thrown by the fact that the button placement is rotated 90 degrees from what I'm used to. The remote+nunchuk option may be best, unless someone knows of an adapter that lets you plug a GC controller into the remote as a Classic Controller stand-in. It'll also be strange adapting to using the Classic Controller for N64 VC games.

The classic controller is a poor fit for some N64 games. Star Fox 64 pops into my mind. Using the Classic Controller Pro is much more comfortable with the longer grips. And for Smash Bros, I learned the nunchuk+remote controls because, again, the classic controller seemed weird to me.